So we have both a Nikon D7000 and a Nikon D3100 camera now. However we are stuck with 18-55mm lens. I'm shopping around for lenses right now. From what I was told, you can't beat the Nikkor lens esp the VR (Vibration Reduction) series for both our bodies. However they are pricey so I'm not jumping on one quite yet as they are $800+ new and used ones in good condition are hard to come by lately it seems (or I'm just searching in the wrong places). I am under the assumption that the best bang for the buck is the 18-200mm lens. Right now the focus of all photos will be portraits with a new baby soon to arrive. Is there another lens that is affordable that will work better for portrait style pics or will I be better off saving for the 18-200mm lens?
If you are doing portraits, get a prime. Whatever the Nikon equivalent of the canon 50mm 1.4. Depth of field plus fast glass is great for taking awesome kid photos.
Something like this? http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B00005LENO/kenrockwellcom Looks like I would be better getting a AF-S lens vs AF lens.
As far as primes, yes a 50mm 1.4 is extremely handy. For super budget and surprisingly sharp photos there is the 'nifty 50' 50mm 1.8 that i believe is still around 100bux. However, its a 'old school' auto focus lens so you need to have a body that has a drive screw. Which I believe your d3100 doesnt have. Additionally, since both cameras are crop sensors, you may want to look at the 35mm 1.8 lens which will give you the field of view of those 50mm lenses, and is quite affordable and sharp. The 18-200 I had for a bit, and it was a great lens. Very handy, but it got difficult for me when I was in a low-light, night photography phase, and sometimes I got tired of the extreme barrel distortion it has in the zoom ranges.
To check for the screw drive look for the bit that is at 7 o'clock on this pic on the mount of the d3100
Yeah the d3100 doesn't have that screw drive. I'd rather get a lens that BOTH cameras can use so we can switch between them both. Thanks keep this info coming. This stuff gets confusing quick.
That is the maximum aperature of the lens. I think the easiest way to view it is that its like your iris. The larger the opening the more light gets in. It's just in the rating, the smaller the number the larger the opening. So in function the 1.4 will see more light in a dark setting. But also the 1.4 gives you a smoother/blurrier depth of field (to fuzzy out of focus stuff). Well, there's more technique junk with that, but that's the basics. The 1.4 and 1.8 isn't too large of a gap, in light ability, and honestly, if you aren't shooting a lot of scenes solely lit by candlelight, i really think a 1.8 is more than enough. As for camera compatibility, the 35 mm 1.8 would be great, esp for baby pics because you won't be soo zoomed in that picture taking becomes difficult in your kids room/crib. The 50mm will be like shooting at 85mm (quite zoomed in for interior shots). http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0...&pf_rd_t=101&pf_rd_p=470938631&pf_rd_i=507846
That puts the terms in perspective. Thanks for clarifying! I was thinking a 50mm is quite far away for shots of kids like that cause I was shooting pics of Turbo (my border collie) and I wasn't close to him at all at 55mm zoom. 35mm would be perfect for a starter to build off of...great pricing to boot! Keep the good info coming!
there are 3 vairations of 50mm prime, 1.8D 1.4G 1.4D , i have both 1.8D and 1.4D, there is a variation of color when you have aperture fully opened but it is really up to you one lens selection since it is quite subjective, search a bit between those 3 for more info